The U.S. Supreme Court’s recently issued an opinion that “course corrects” judicial reviews of environmental impact statements under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).
The Supreme Court issue its unanimous opinion, 8-0, in Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County, CO (No. 23-975) in late May.
Justice Brett Kavanaugh, writing for the majority, found that NEPA was initially intended to serve as a procedural check to inform agency decision-making, rather than paralyzing it. Justice Sotomayor filed a concurring opinion, in which Kagan and Jackson joined. Justice Gorsuch took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.
The decision reversed the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruling that the Surface Transportation Board’s NEPA review had not done enough in its EIS to review the potential upstream and downstream effects of a proposed railroad line.
The court dismissed overly detailed judicial scrutiny of agency environmental reviews. It determined that agencies possess specialized factual expertise in evaluating environmental consequences and should receive considerable deference from courts conducting reviews.
To further enhance efficiency, the court suggested that upcoming NEPA proceedings should be more narrowly focused, briefer, and completed more promptly.
APPA said this shift in approach will likely create greater certainty for both agencies and developers regarding whether NEPA reviews meet the required standards.
The court has instructed agencies to focus their NEPA analysis on the environmental effect of the project at issue, rather than projects “separate in time or place from the construction and operation of the [proposed project].”
